Still not seeing results

SteveyBrule

I went on the scales this morning and I've actually put weight on, about a pound. My scales are rubbish though, so I'm going to re-check in a week on some digital scales.

The pizza and beer is probably doing it for you.

Just a heads up, to avoid disappointment, getting a new scale realistically won't help the situation. All scales will show you different numbers the first time you step on them, the key being showing the weight loss.

You may get a new scale and it will show you 3 lbs heavier than the old scale, and neither one may be right. The key is using them to keep track of the weight lost, which most all scales can do accurately, especially if it's mechanical.

bjkidfun

Nice read, bumping to read later.

ChrisM8971

With respect, Chris' method needs clarifying. If a pan of sauce weighed in at 500g, why would you divide by 100? You wouldn't.

I think Isabella clarified this better than I ca, but why wouldn't you, unless of course you intended to eat all 500 g in once sitting? Dividing the total by 100 would give you 5 servings and accurate calories & macros for 1 portion as 1 portion now = 100 g

100 g portion sizes make perfect sense if you think about it because you dont have to worry how much you weigh out. Spoon 101 g onto your pasta and its 1.01 servings, weigh over 150 g then its 1.5 servings

It allows you to be more exact

logg1e

We'll say I make a sauce for two people with 330 calories in it and it weighs 428g. I think, "my half is 165 calories".

Using your method I do 428g divided by 100g is 4.28 portions. 330calories divided by 4.28 is, er something on my calculator. I'm too lazy to do so I estimate it to be 75 calories per 100g. Then I want my half of the meal so do 75 calories x 2.14 again too lazy so I estimate it to be 160.5.

What am I missing??

lisaabenjamin

OP, as well as possibly underestimating your calories consumed, the flip side of the coin is that you could be burning fewer calories than you think.

Do you use heart rate monitor to calculate your exercise, or just input from the MFP database? If the latter, you should know that this is almost always inaccurate too :-/

Not only is it, again, a problem with this being an open community database, but when you plug your time spent exercising into MFP it just spits out a number based on a mathematical formula for the "average" person - of course there is no such thing as an average person, and it doesn't take into account how hard you were actually working. E.g. you could say you spent an hour doing aerobics, but were you really going for it, doing sweating, heart pounding until you could take no more, or was it quite easy? A heart rate monitor is the best way to more accurately measure calories burned.

Either way, the fact is, unless you have some kind of medical condition that messes with your metabolism, if you're not losing weight then you are getting your calories in vs calories out equation wrong somehow.

ChrisM8971

We'll say I make a sauce for two people with 330 calories in it and it weighs 428g. I think, "my half is 165 calories".

Using your method I do 428g divided by 100g is 4.28 portions. 330calories divided by 4.28 is, er something on my calculator. I'm too lazy to do so I estimate it to be 75 calories per 100g. Then I want my half of the meal so do 75 calories x 2.14 again too lazy so I estimate it to be 160.5.

What am I missing??

How you do this is entirely up to you and I guess a recipe where you eat both portions may not be the best example. However imagine you are cooking for a family and its a big pot of food.

But lets use your example of a 2 portion sauce, do you estimate half when you use it? or do you weigh it cooked then weigh out exactly half?

What happens if you make it as a two person sauce and think hmmm there is more there than I thought there was or I am not that hungry so I will only have 1/3 of it or slightly more than a 1/3 but less than a 1/2 suddenly the calculation or estimation becomes more complicated.

Dividing the weight by 100 just means you can weigh out however much you want to eat and have an accurate calculation of calories.

But if it doesn't make sense to you its not compulsory, I tried to find an easy way to cook for multiple people most of whom don't care how much they eat allowing those of us who are counting calories to continue to do so

ETA Grammar

ChrisM8971

Mmmm...

You know what, I like buffalo mozzarella, but with tomato I think that the regular cow mozzarella is better, since it's taste is milder.
Also, buffalo mozzarella tend to produce a lot of fluid, that would dilute a bit too much the mix of tomato juice.

Anyway, one of our "patriotic" dish is the "caprese salad", that is exactly tomato, cow mozzarella, basil (red white green, our flag) with oil and salt.

But I guess that if you particularly like buffalo mozzarella, you can go for it with tomatoes, no problem!

This is interesting to know and I think its a misunderstanding we have in the UK in the belief that its not worth having unless its buffalo! Glad to hear that isnt the case and will continue to use cow mozzarella because it is easier to find :-)

logg1e

Thanks for taking the time to explain Chris. I used two as an example of cooking for two people (not eating two portions!!). It would equally work for dividing by 3 or 4 or however many there are. Normally I divide by two because I generally cook for two adults. Sometimes I multiple by a third or two fifths if I want less than the other adult. And yes, I do weigh out the portions.

As you say, it's horses for courses and lots of people have already said they find your method very helpful.

ILiftHeavyAcrylics

Thanks for taking the time to explain Chris. I used two as an example of cooking for two people (not eating two portions!!). It would equally work for dividing by 3 or 4 or however many there are. Normally I divide by two because I generally cook for two adults. Sometimes I multiple by a third or two fifths if I want less than the other adult. And yes, I do weigh out the portions.

As you say, it's horses for courses and lots of people have already said they find your method very helpful.

I use both methods. I do the one you're describing most of the time, but for certain things that I might just want to have a tiny bite of I'll use Chris's method (cheese danish, I'm looking at you). As long as whatever method is working for you that's what matters. :drinker:

srk369

I like the idea of Chris's method because I always forget what the portion was. I'll make a large meal, weigh it and divide by how many portions I think it is and have my 1 portion. Sometimes I'll weigh out my leftover meal right away, others I'm searching for my piece of paper where I wrote all my weights down as I prepped them trying to remember what the portion was for 1/6 of the meal. Thanks for the tip!

Now if MFP would just let us adjust the measurement on each ingredient in the recipe instead of entering it all over again, I'd be set!